Peak-Inspiratory-Flow-Rate Guided Inhalation Therapy Reduce Severe Exacerbation of COPD

Evolution of Peak Inspiratory Flow During Hospitalization of Patients with COPD - A Prospective Monocentric Observational Study

Purpose

Effective treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) primarily relies on treatment delivered through inhaler devices. The effectiveness of dry powder inhalers is compromised by insufficient peak inspiratory flow (PIF). Understanding the evolution of PIF during hospitalization is crucial for optimizing inhaler selection and improving patient outcomes.

Patients and Methods

A prospective monocentric observational study was conducted at Fribourg Hospital, Switzerland, from August 2022 to December 2022. PIF was assessed at hospital admission and discharge in all patients with COPD admitted to the internal medicine division. The primary outcome was the evolution of maximum PIF at a fixed medium-low resistance (R2) during hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included the variation of PIF in the intra-assessment evaluation and transitioning between sufficient and insufficient PIF.

Results

Forty-nine patients were enrolled, 61% were men and 65% experienced an acute COPD exacerbation (AECOPD). The maximum PIF for R2 increased from 64.8 ± 17.2 L/min at admission to 70.7 ± 17.9 L/min at discharge, showing a 5.9 L/min improvement (95% CI: 2.4-9.5, p < 0.01). A hospitalization >5 days in patients hospitalized for an AECOPD is associated with a higher increase in PIF (p < 0.05). In the intra-assessment measurement, we observed an increase in PIF in the successive measurements (p < 0.01).

Conclusion

Hospitalized patients with COPD experienced a significant increase in PIF during their stay. These results appear to be independent of the reason for hospitalization but need to be confirmed with a larger sample. Nevertheless, these findings underscore the importance of regular PIF assessment and influence inhaler selection.

Insights from Real-World Evidence on the Use of Inhalers in Clinical Practice

Background: Despite the ongoing innovations and the availability of numerous effective inhaled treatment options, achieving optimal disease control in most patients frequently remains disappointing. Unfortunately, although inhaled therapy is the cornerstone of respiratory disease management, the selection of the most appropriate inhaler is still overlooked or underestimated by some healthcare professionals, and inhaler misuse remains a significant challenge in managing chronic respiratory diseases which directly influences patients' quality of life, clinical outcomes, and risk of disease progression. Materials and Methods: This is a unicentric, observational, cross-sectional study designed to evaluate the inhaled therapy prescribed in hospitalized patients and to analyze device changes after hospitalization, as well as the factors associated with these changes. A single face-to-face visit was performed during the patient's hospitalization, where the inhaled therapy used prior to hospitalization was evaluated: technique (critical errors), compliance (TAI questionnaire), maximum peak inspiratory flow [PIF (L/min)], and level of inhaler handling-related knowledge. A binary logistic regression model was used to explore the association between changing device at discharge and the other independent variables Results: The inhaler most used during hospitalization was the metered-dose inhaler (MDI) with a chamber (51.9% of patients), with the dry powdered inhalers (DPI) being the inhalers used in 43% of maintenance inhaled therapies in the community setting prior to hospitalization. In addition, 90% of patients showed a maximum PIF ≥ 30 L/min, and 35.6% performed critical inhaler errors. These patients had statistically significantly lower maximum PIF values (52.1 L/min in patients with critical inhaler errors vs. 60.8 L/min without critical inhaler errors; p > 0.001) and were more likely to exhibit poor inhaler compliance compared to those without critical errors (50.5% vs. 31.0%, respectively). More than half of the patients who used MDI with spacer chamber made critical inhaler errors; 69.9% showed regular or poor treatment adherence, although 75.6% demonstrated good knowledge about inhaler handling. Only in 27% of the patients did the healthcare professional change the type of inhaler after hospitalization within clinical practice. The medical and nursing staff responsible for the patient's hospitalization were not informed of the assessment carried out in the study. The probability of not performing a device change at discharge was lower in patients with previous at-home treatment with combined inhaled therapy with LABA + ICS (OR 0.3 [0.18-0.83], p = 0.016) and in patients under triple inhaled therapy (OR 0.3 [0.17-0.76], p = 0.007). No significant differences were observed in inhaler changes when considering the frequency of critical inhaler errors, inhaler handling-related knowledge or maximum PIF values. Conclusions: Our study highlights the urgent need for a more personalized inhaler selection and consistent monitoring by healthcare professionals to minimize inhaler misuse, increase treatment compliance and adherence, and improve disease management outcomes. It is essential to provide training and promote the role of nursing in the evaluation and education of inhaled therapy. Additionally, the use of standardized approaches and tools, such as the CHECK DIAL, is crucial to facilitate the adaptation of devices to patients' needs.

Inhaler personalisation based on peak inspiratory flow (PIF) among dry powder inhaler users: a pilot randomised control trial (RCT) in COPD

Background

Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) are commonly used among patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). These inhalers are breath-actuated, and require patients to generate sufficient peak inspiratory flow (PIF) to disaggregate the drug powder into respirable fine particles and deliver it to the lower airway tracts. Inhaler personalisation based on PIF among DPI users has not been studied in Malaysia, thus we conducted the present pilot study to determine the feasibility of conducting such research among COPD patients.

Methods

This was an open-label pilot randomised control trial, conducted from June 2021-January 2022 at the respiratory clinic of Hospital Canselor Tuanku Muhriz, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Measurement of PIF was performed with In-Check DIAL G16 among adult COPD patients treated with DPI and had suboptimal PIF. Eligible subjects were randomised using block randomisation into two groups, either the interventional group or the control group.

Results

Twenty-two COPD patients fulfilled the study criteria and were randomised to intervention (n = 11) and control (n = 11) groups. For the interventional group, there were statistically significant improvements between baseline and at 12 weeks for both FEV1 and CAT scores. The mean (% predicted) FEV1 were 54.6 ± 20.4% and 56.6 ± 19.8% (p = 0.026), pre-and post-intervention. The mean CAT score at baseline was 24.4 ± 5.8 and reduced to 19.6 ± 4.4 at 12 weeks (p = 0.012). For the control group, the mean (% predicted) FEV1 at baseline was 58.0 ± 21.9% and 56.5 ± 20.7% at 12 weeks, with no statistical significance difference (p = 0.143). However, there was a statistically significant difference in CAT scores at baseline and 12 weeks, with a mean of 26.5 ± 6.1 and 23.3 ± 5.6, respectively (p = 0.010).

Conclusion

The findings from the present pilot RCT highlighted that inhaler personalisation based on PIF among COPD patients was feasible and practical.

Prevalence of Critical Errors and Insufficient Peak Inspiratory Flow in Patients Hospitalized with COPD in a Department of General Internal Medicine: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background

The suboptimal use of inhalers in the treatment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is probably a major but poorly documented problem in hospitalized patients. We aimed to describe the prevalence of misused inhalers among patients hospitalized with COPD in a department of general internal medicine.

Methods

We conducted a monocentric cross-sectional study in consecutive patients with a diagnosis of COPD and hospitalized between August 2022 and April 2023 in the internal medicine division of Fribourg Hospital, Switzerland. Patients underwent an assessment of their inhaler technique and peak inspiratory flow (PIF) using the In-Check Dial G16®. The primary outcome was the prevalence of misused inhalers, defined as an inhaler used with a critical error and/or insufficient PIF. Secondary outcomes included the prevalence of inhalers unsuitable to patients' characteristics and of patients using at least one misused inhaler.

Results

The study included 96 patients and 160 inhalers were assessed at admission. Among these inhalers, 111 (69.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 61.6-76.4) were misused; 105 (65.6%; 95% CI 57.7-72.9) due to the presence of a critical error in the inhalation technique and 22 (13.8%; 95% CI 8.8-20.1) due to insufficient PIF. Concerning the secondary outcome, 27 inhalers (16.9%) were unsuitable, and 79 patients (82.3%) used at least one misused inhaler.

Conclusion

Among patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of COPD, two-thirds of inhalers were misused. Suboptimal use was mainly due to the presence of critical errors, but also to the presence of an insufficient PIF and unsuitable inhalers.

Clinical characteristics of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with superoptimal peak inspiratory flow rate

Characteristics of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with superoptimal peak inspiratory flow rates (PIFR) has not been thoroughly investigated. This study aimed to compare the characteristics between COPD patients with superoptimal PIFR and those with optimal and sub-optimal PIFR. PIFR was measured using In-Check DIAL G16 and categorized into sub-optimal (PIFR lower than that required by the patient's device), optimal, and superoptimal (peak PIFR ≥ 90 L/min). Considering COPD patients with sub-optimal PIFR as the reference group, analyses were performed to identify PIFR-related factors. Subgroup analysis was performed according to the forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) % of the predicted value (%pred). Among 444 post-bronchodilator-confirmed COPD patients from seven tertiary hospitals in South Korea, 98, 223, and 123 were classified into the sub-optimal, optimal, and superoptimal PIFR groups, respectively. The superoptimal PIFR group were younger, had an increased proportion of males, a higher body mass index, lowest number of comorbidities and less frequent exacerbation in the previous year, as well as the highest forced vital capacity %pred. The adjusted odds ratio for frequent exacerbation in the previous year was lower in the superoptimal PIFR group than in the sub-optimal PIFR group and was more pronounced in patients with an FEV1%pred of < 70%. COPD patients with superoptimal PIFR have clinical characteristics different from those patients with the sub-optimal and optimal PIFR. Having a high inspiratory flow may be a favorable trait in COPD.

Suboptimal peak inspiratory flow rate: a noticeable risk factor for inhaler concordance in patients with chronic airway diseases

BACKGROUND

Inhaler concordance and the peak inspiratory flow rate (PIFR) are important determinants of treatment effects in patients with chronic airway diseases. Adequate PIFR is required for driving aerosol medication into the lower respiratory tract. However, the relationship between them has not been discussed previously. This study aimed to describe the characteristics of inhaler concordance and PIFR in Chinese patients with chronic airway diseases and discuss the associated variables and the relationship between them.

METHODS

In this single-centre, observational study, a total of 680 patients with chronic airway diseases were enrolled from July 2021 to April 2023. We collected data on the socio-demographic and clinical variables of inhaler concordance using the test of adherence to inhalers (TAI) and PIFR. Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to examine variables related to inhaler concordance and PIFR.

RESULTS

A total of 49.4% of patients had low concordance. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were more concordant than patients with asthma (mean TAI score: 43.60 vs 41.20; p<0.01), while there was no difference in concordance between the asthma-COPD overlap group and the asthma or COPD group. Suboptimal PIFR (adjusted OR, 1.61; 95% CI 1.04 to 2.51) increased the risk of poor concordance among all patients, while triple therapy (adjusted OR, 0.60; 95% CI 0.35 to 0.86) reduced the risk. A total of 54.9% of patients had suboptimal PIFR. Older age, lower educational level, use of dry powder inhalers and lower forced expiratory volume in 1 s % predicted were significantly correlated with insufficient PIFR. Subgroup analysis revealed a greater proportion of patients with insufficient PIFR during exacerbation than during the stable phase (61.7% vs 43.5%, p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Inhaler concordance was low, and suboptimal PIFR was a risk factor for poor concordance among Chinese patients with chronic airway diseases. In addition, current inhalation devices may not be suitable, and PIFR reassessment should be considered for patients with COPD during exacerbation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The study was registered in chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR2100052527) on 31 October 2021.

Aerosol Plumes of Inhalers Used in COPD

INTRODUCTION

The selection of inhaler device is of critical importance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as the interaction between a patient's inhalation profile and the aerosol characteristics of an inhaler can affect drug delivery and lung deposition. This study assessed the in vitro aerosol characteristics of inhaler devices approved for the treatment of COPD, including a soft mist inhaler (SMI), pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs), and dry powder inhalers (DPIs).

METHODS

High-speed video recording was used to visualize and measure aerosol velocity and spray duration for nine different inhalers (one SMI, three pMDIs, and five DPIs), each containing dual or triple fixed-dose combinations of long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists and long-acting β2-agonists, with or without an inhaled corticosteroid. Measurements were taken in triplicate at experimental flow rates of 30, 60, and 90 l/min. Optimal flow rates were defined based on pharmacopoeial testing requirements: 30 l/min for pMDIs and SMIs, and the rate achieving a 4-kPa pressure drop against internal inhaler resistance for DPIs. Comparison of aerosol plumes was based on the experimental flow rates closest to the optimal flow rates.

RESULTS

The Respimat SMI had the slowest plume velocity (0.99 m/s) and longest spray duration (1447 ms) compared with pMDIs (velocity: 3.65-5.09 m/s; duration: 227-270 ms) and DPIs (velocity: 1.43-4.60 m/s; duration: 60-757 ms). With increasing flow rates, SMI aerosol duration was unaffected, but velocity increased (maximum 2.63 m/s), pMDI aerosol velocity and duration were unaffected, and DPI aerosol velocity tended to increase, with a more variable impact on duration.

CONCLUSIONS

Aerosol characteristics (velocity and duration of aerosol plume) vary by inhaler type. Plume velocity was lower and spray duration longer for the SMI compared with pMDIs and DPIs. Increasing experimental flow rate was associated with faster plume velocity for DPIs and the SMI, with no or variable impact on plume duration, whereas pMDI aerosol velocity and duration were unaffected by increasing flow rate.

Respiratory function in healthy long-term meditators: A cross-sectional comparative study

PURPOSE

Respiratory function is thought to improve with long-term meditation. This study aimed to assess respiratory function in a cohort of healthy long-term meditators and non-meditators in Sri Lanka.

METHODS

Respiratory function of healthy, skilled long-term meditators (n = 20) practicing Buddhist meditation consistently >3 years, and age-sex matched non-meditators (n = 20) were assessed by assessing resting respiratory rate, spirometry, breath-holding time and six-minute-walk distance. Data were analyzed with SPSS-23 statistical software.

RESULTS

The long-term meditators; 45% male, mean (SD) total lifetime meditation experience 12.8 (6.5) years, aged 45.8 (8.74) years, BMI 23.68 (2.23) kgm-2, and non-meditators; 45% male, mean (SD) age 45.3 (8.05) years, BMI 23.68 (3.28) kgm-2, were comparable. Long-term meditators had slower resting respiratory rates [mean (SD); 13.35 (1.9) vs. 18.37 (2.31) breaths/minute; p < 0.001], higher peak expiratory flow rates [mean (SD); 9.89 (2.5) vs. 8.22 (2.3) L/s; p = 0.03], and higher inspiratory breath-holding times [mean (SD); 74 (29.84) vs. 53.61 (26.83) seconds, p = 0.038] compared to non-meditators. There was no significant difference in the six-minute-walk distance and estimated maximal oxygen consumption between the two groups.Resting respiratory rate of long-term meditators, showed a significant negative correlation with total lifetime meditation practice in years (r = -0.444, p = 0.049), and the average length of a meditation session per day (r = -0.65, p = 0.002). The long-term meditators with longer duration of retreat participation demonstrated lower resting respiratory rate (r = -0.522, p = 0.018) and higher tidal volumes (r = 0.474, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term meditators had significantly slower resting respiratory rates and longer breath-holding times, with better spirometry parameters than non-meditators. Greater practice duration and retreat experience appear to be associated with improved resting respiratory function in long-term meditators.

Evaluation of Peak Inspiratory Flow Rate in Hospitalized Palliative Care Patients with COPD

Dry powder inhalers are an effective yet costly COPD medication-delivery device. Patients must possess a minimum peak inspiratory flow rate (PIFR) for inhaled medication to be properly deposited into the lungs. Hospitalized palliative-care patients with diminished lung function due to advanced COPD may not possess the minimum PIFR (30 L/min) for adequate drug delivery. This study aims to quantify PIFR values for hospitalized palliative-care patients with advanced COPD to evaluate whether these patients meet the minimum PIFR requirements. Hospitalized patients ≥18 years old with a palliative-care consultation were eligible if they had a diagnosis of advanced COPD (GOLD C or D). Patients were excluded if they lacked decision-making capacity or had a positive COVID-19 test within the previous 90 days. Three PIFR values were recorded utilizing the In-Check^TM device, with the highest of the three PIFR attempts being utilized for statistical analysis. Eighteen patients were enrolled, and the mean of the highest PIFR readings was 72.5 L/min (±29 L/min). Post hoc analysis indicated 99.9% power when comparing the average best PIFR to the minimum PIFR (30 L/min) but only 51.4% power when compared to the optimal PIFR (60 L/min). This study found that palliative-care patients possess the minimum PIFR for DPI drug delivery.

High Prevalence of Suboptimal Peak Inspiratory Flow in Hospitalized Patients With COPD: A Real-world Study

For optimal drug delivery, dry powder inhalers (DPIs) depend on the patient's peak inspiratory flow (PIF) and the internal resistance of the device to create turbulent energy and disaggregate the powder. A suboptimal PIF may lead to ineffective drug inhalation into the lungs. Our objective was to report the prevalence of suboptimal PIF in patients with COPD hospitalized for any reason using 1 or more DPIs. In this real-world, observational, single‑site, retrospective study, PIF was measured for each DPI using the In-Check™ DIAL set to match the resistance of the DPI used by each patient. PIFs <60 and <30L/min were considered suboptimal for low to medium-high- and high-resistance DPIs, respectively. At initial hospitalization, the prevalence of suboptimal PIF was 44.6% in 829 patients (mean age, 71.7 years; 56.8% female); 21.2% were measured during admission for a COPD exacerbation. Suboptimal PIF percentages were 61.0% (38.1±9.5L/min [mean±standard deviation (SD)]) across low to medium-high-resistance DPIs and 17.2% (20.7±4.2L/min) for high-resistance DPIs. Overall, 190/829 patients had 1 or more 30-day all-cause readmission with 253 corresponding PIF measurements. For readmissions, suboptimal PIFs were observed in 49.5% (94/190) of patients. Suboptimal PIF percentages were 65.4% (38.4±9.2L/min) for low to medium-high-resistance DPIs and 19.8% (22.4±3.3L/min) for high-resistance DPIs. As the overall prevalence of suboptimal PIFs in hospitalized patients with COPD varied according to the specific internal resistance of the DPI, these findings may have clinical implications for inhaler selection.